1. Laws are only proposed by EC, not the Parliament (as in parliamentary democracies). 2. EP is only able to vote against them and ammend them. 3. A "no" vote by EP doesn't mean anything. If the Council (i.e. the governments, which in parliamentary democracies don't have the power to make new law) disagrees, a compromise must be seeked. 4. Making a "no" stick in EP requires more than just a majority. Happened once (with the software patents).

How is that democratic?

The system is far from perfect, but the governments are the other chamber of the parliament in the context of the EU, not the executive power, which is the commission (which is nominated by the council, but also voted in by the parliament once again).

The member states themselves (which sorry, democratically speaking means their citizens) want to keep the council more powerful than the parliament. Fixing the power disparity has always been hard, since the member state don't really want to give away their power to the EU.

Anyway, a "no" vote from the EP means a great deal, your information seems outdated to me. The EC can approve a law proposed by the commission alone only in a restricted subset of topics. Everything else is dealt with with the parliament and the council being on equal footing and acting as a bicameral democracy with equal chambers would when approving a law.

The alternative of the current system is to reduce the power the member states hold in the EU creating a real federation or US of Europe. Which for sure will not happen in the short term, and if the EU does not react correctly (and strongly) to this vote, probably never will.

House of Lords.

How is that democratic?

It suffices to look at how they behaved themselves and continue to behave themselves while trying to shove TTIP down our throats. They are nothing more than a front for corporate lobbyists to write legislation to suit themselves.

As for the EP. 1. It is composed of amateur politicians. 2. They are effectively powerless. 3. They can easily be bought.

If it is composed of amateur politicians (which is not at least in some cases, but I agree in many it has been used as a way to park out politicians that did not get a seat in a national election...) the fault is also with the EU people that always underestimated (look at the turnouts!) how important the institution was, particularly after 2009, when it got more power and control.